Post by: wooltie on January 06, 2017, 08:36:21 AM
Post by: Odell on January 06, 2017, 08:49:49 AM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on January 06, 2017, 09:57:39 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on January 06, 2017, 10:25:23 AM
Post by: bigtex on January 06, 2017, 10:40:18 AM
It would've been helpful for the article to include the bill.See it in my post I made a couple days ago
Post by: andersonjk4 on January 06, 2017, 10:42:06 AM
It would've been helpful for the article to include the bill.
I don't believe it was a specific bill that was passed. The language was included in the House's Rules Package. Here is a decent article summarizing the rules package. The discussion on land transfer is at the end.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2017/01/04/New-House-rules-No-floor-photography-and-no-mention-of-GOP-ethics-proposal/2841483495650/ (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2017/01/04/New-House-rules-No-floor-photography-and-no-mention-of-GOP-ethics-proposal/2841483495650/)
Post by: bigtex on January 06, 2017, 10:47:14 AM
:yeah: it's doneIt would've been helpful for the article to include the bill.
I don't believe it was a specific bill that was passed. The language was included in the House's Rules Package. Here is a decent article summarizing the rules package. The discussion on land transfer is at the end.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2017/01/04/New-House-rules-No-floor-photography-and-no-mention-of-GOP-ethics-proposal/2841483495650/ (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2017/01/04/New-House-rules-No-floor-photography-and-no-mention-of-GOP-ethics-proposal/2841483495650/)
Post by: baldopepper on January 06, 2017, 11:08:09 AM
Post by: 12Gauge on January 06, 2017, 11:09:43 AM
Post by: wapiti hunter2 on January 06, 2017, 11:18:02 AM
I guess this should go under Trumps Accomplishments since it will be signed by him.
Post by: Skyvalhunter on January 06, 2017, 11:46:54 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on January 06, 2017, 12:29:25 PM
It would've been helpful for the article to include the bill.
I don't believe it was a specific bill that was passed. The language was included in the House's Rules Package. Here is a decent article summarizing the rules package. The discussion on land transfer is at the end.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2017/01/04/New-House-rules-No-floor-photography-and-no-mention-of-GOP-ethics-proposal/2841483495650/ (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2017/01/04/New-House-rules-No-floor-photography-and-no-mention-of-GOP-ethics-proposal/2841483495650/)
Thanks.
Post by: Bean Counter on January 06, 2017, 12:32:51 PM
This is what you get with people who think anything federal outside ofthe militaryenumerated powers isevilunconstitutional.
There you go ;)
Quote
States can do many things better but managing public land in the trust of all the people is a job of the federal government.
Because so much wildlife crosses state borders, and I hunt in multiple states, wildlife management should be a job of the federal governemnt, too. Lets hand over wildlife management to the USFWS. What could possibly go wrong?
Post by: Stein on January 06, 2017, 01:20:07 PM
States also have a great track record of selling off land.
Since this was a rules package, I don't believe it goes to the pres for signature.
Post by: Bob33 on January 06, 2017, 01:58:10 PM
Them sneaky Republicans.No, it won't be; there's nothing to sign. It was a change in House rules (effective now) that allows land transfers to occur without consideration of cost.
I guess this should go under Trumps Accomplishments since it will be signed by him.
Oh well - nice try. It's tough when facts get in the way of an agenda.
Post by: baldopepper on January 06, 2017, 02:17:13 PM
Post by: huntnphool on January 06, 2017, 02:18:01 PM
Some States have a great track record at managing wildlife.
Fixed it for you. ;)
Post by: wapiti hunter2 on January 07, 2017, 03:46:33 PM
Them sneaky Republicans.No, it won't be; there's nothing to sign. It was a change in House rules (effective now) that allows land transfers to occur without consideration of cost.
I guess this should go under Trumps Accomplishments since it will be signed by him.
Oh well - nice try. It's tough when facts get in the way of an agenda.
He will still own it as it occurred with his congress. I sure haven't heard anything (tweets) from him against it.
Post by: Bean Counter on January 07, 2017, 04:11:11 PM
Them sneaky Republicans.No, it won't be; there's nothing to sign. It was a change in House rules (effective now) that allows land transfers to occur without consideration of cost.
I guess this should go under Trumps Accomplishments since it will be signed by him.
Oh well - nice try. It's tough when facts get in the way of an agenda.
He will still own it as it occurred with his congress. I sure haven't heard anything (tweets) from him against it.
The POTUS doesn't 'own' Congress. That's why each of our three co-equal branches of government has its own article in our Constitution. Even the lesser referenced SCOTUS probably has more power than it should after Marbury v. Madison. They make up the first three articles and there's only a couple more after that. Its a really liberating document to read some time :twocents:
Post by: Fl0und3rz on January 07, 2017, 04:18:02 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on January 08, 2017, 06:28:32 AM
Post by: JasonG on January 08, 2017, 07:56:34 AM
Post by: bigtex on January 08, 2017, 09:53:42 AM
Now, how can we stop this from going any farther?Well what passed the House is already done, it's a change in rules and not like a law change like most bills would be.
We (outdoorsman, environmentalists, and public lands enthusiasts combined) need to be vocal together that any fed lands sale/transfer to the extent that some are proposing is not acceptable.
Post by: wheels on January 09, 2017, 10:32:20 PM
Post by: JasonG on January 10, 2017, 04:49:19 PM